In my experience, a bad manager can do damage much faster than a good manager can fix things. I've seen awful managers literally dismantle a well-functioning section of an organization in what seems like an instant.
As far as I can tell no one aims to be a bad manager. In fact, poor managers never realize the harm they are inflicting on an organization. As someone once told me, "People who don't get it, don't know that they don't get it." (Ironically, the person who passed this bit of wisdom on to me didn't get it either. Or, maybe, I'm the one who doesn't get it?) That means bad managers don't mean to be bad managers. They just don't know what they are doing.
To be fair, most managers don't know what they are doing. It's just that the good ones realize it and are determined to find out what they should do.
"Don't Just Do Something, Stand There!"
The number one problem people have when they become new manager is they think that they are supposed to do something. They want to leave their mark to prove that they are a good manager. That means things need to change—even if everything is already working pretty well. This is not necessarily bad if the manager knows what needs to be done, but that is rarely the case.
I've watched a friend of mine go through a couple of jobs in the last number of years. This is a person who is successful no matter where he goes—despite management. Just like many other people, he has had to deal with managers who make capricious decisions that have a severe impact on him and the organization. The managers have been totally blind to the effects of making changes which without much thought dramatically alter the lives of workers. They actually believe that as managers their job is to do something. In the process, they lower company morale and devastate systems. Eventually, as noted in the Oats and Hall song, "The strong give up and move on, While the weak give up and stay." The best people leave. This is what my friend has ultimately done in these situations. Coincidentally (or maybe not), in both cases the horrible manager has been fired after his departure. Ironic that the behavior of these awful managers which was so unsettling for my friend and other members of the organization resulted in their own ultimate downfall.
My advice to new managers is no nothing—at least until you learn what really needs to be done.
What Needs to be Done?
The second mistake new managers make is thinking that they know what needs to be done without any internal input. It is possible that an organization needs a thorough cleanout, but unless a group is not performing at all, it's impossible to know that without an investigation. If the unit you're managing was performing before your arrival, then the mantra is "Don't screw it up." Your brilliance may lie in your ability to not tinker with things by keeping your hands in your pockets. This is not as easy as it sounds for people who lack self-confidence.
In any case, the only way a new manager can find out what's really going on is by talking to the people who are already there. Most people spend their work life evaluating the problems with the place where they work. If a manager takes the time to really listen a wealth of information will be accumulated in a relatively short period. This is especially true in organizations that are running well.
If the group has poor performance, the new manager needs to go through the same investigation by interviewing juniors, but then he or she will need to make full use of their "crap detector." There will be gems of wisdom available, but they will come from unexpected (and usually previously suppressed) places.
The beauty of investigating before making any changes is that a plan is likely to emerge on its own—if you truly listen. Sadly, the truth is that most people are thinking about what they are planning to say while pretending to listen. The worst managers will go through the motions while ignoring the warnings and opportunities offered by others. That's a corollary to the first quote, "People who don't listen, don't know that they don't listen."
I can't tell you how many times I asked someone what was said at a meeting only to get the words "I told them…" Hmm.
The "First Assistant To" Theory
It is often misunderstood that the job of a manager is not necessarily to change things. It is to create an environment where the best people can excel. I think it was Peter Drucker who said something to the effect that the job of a manager is to be the first assistant to everyone else. In other words, the job entails clearing obstacles, giving support, and resolving problems that make it difficult for people to live up to their potential. When you look at the management job from the "first assistant" perspective, finding out what you should be doing becomes easy—just ask them what will help them get their job done.
Tip: The best book for the basics of good management (regardless of the business or organization) is The Effective Executive by Peter Drucker. I first read this book 40 years ago and it is just as relevant today. This book includes the most important things a new manager needs to know. But be warned, as short and easy as the book is to read, if "you don't get it", you won't get this book either.
New managers often make the mistake of thinking that doing what got them promoted in the first place is the thing to do now. This is often a huge mistake. The skillset required to be a good manager—listening and clearing a path for others—is rarely what the person promotable in the first place. It is worth the time to rethink your skills and how they may be best utilized in the new job.
Unfortunately, no amount of advice will solve the problem of bad managers. One of the biggest problems is higher-ups don't give enough consideration to the skills required for management. Too often, they are promoted based on current success in a different job or seniority. Good managers tend to promote good managers while bad managers don't even take the time to consider the important questions
If you work for someone so unfit for the job that they get in the way of you doing your job, then the only option may be to move on. It's unlikely that there is anything you can do to change the person and reporting them up the chain of command will likely only make the situation worse. My advice is to move to a new job where there is a chance that you will work for someone who knows what they're doing. Sometimes the grass is greener on the other side.
If you happen to get that new managerial job, then tread softly with your eyes wide open. It may take a while to build your credibility and strengthen the organization, but if you move too fast, you risk creating a terrible wasteland.
Saturday, September 23, 2023
Saturday, December 19, 2015
Self-Publish EPUB E-Books with Free Sigil Software
Whether Writing Books, Designing E-Cards, Publishing User Manuals, or Creating Portable Photo and Video Collections, Sigil May Be the Software for You! Plus, It's Free!
The EPUB Format
First, a little about the EPUB e-book format. EPUB has become the standard for every e-reader, except the Amazon Kindle. Tablets, smartphones, and computers all have free apps available for reading EPUB e-books. The only other format which rivals EPUB is the PDF format. Since the widely used PDF file is fixed-page oriented format, it's great for printing documents. However, it's not as good as EPUB for reading on a tablet or smartphone because it doesn't easily conform to various screen sizes and shapes. The fact that EPUB converts to both PDF and Amazon Kindle compatible files without a problem makes it the ideal format for writing an e-book. (I use the free Calibre software for e-book file conversion to PDF for printing and MOBI for the Kindle.)
Converting files written in Microsoft Word to EPUB adds a load of unnecessary junk to the source code. The problem with using word processing programs for creating EPUB files is that the documents files are page oriented—similar to PDFs. EPUB readers don't care about pages, margins or default type size. These word processing parameters complicate the document to EPUB conversion problem.
Note; Converting from PDF to EPUB can be just as problematic as converting from word processing files. I find that the best results occur when the process starts with an EPUB file.
Sigil—As Good as It Gets!
 |
| Sigil offers a view of your EPUB e-book which shows all the chapters on the left. Edit in the center pane. |
Virtually everything you can do in any word processing program you can do in Sigil. The number one complaint about Sigil is that it only does EPUBs. But, adding other formats to Sigil would defeat the purpose of the software—quickly and easily building EPUBs which conform to the standard and work with any e-reader. Besides, it's so easy to use Calibre to convert from EPUB to almost any other format, it would be a waste of good programming time for the support people to add other unneeded formats.
One of the advantage of using EPUB and Sigil software as the starting point is that they are XHTML based. That means you can take the HTML source code from virtually any Web page and turn it into a chapter in an EPUB e-book. For example, I copied the HTML source code under the HTML tab in the WordPress editor for my blogs on Beginning AutoHotkey Hotstrings, then pasted each into a chapter in the code view of the Sigil e-book editor. I instantly added another chapter for the e-book from the previously written blog. All that was needed were a few minor format changes (to make it a book), plus indexing and the addition of extras.
If you want to self-publish or merely create self-contained portable collections easily read on any device or computer, then give Sigil a shot.
Thursday, July 30, 2015
Should I Get Windows 10?
After years of working with Windows 8 and 8.1 (and writing books about it), I'm ready for Windows 10…almost. Microsoft has completed a full circle and finally produced a proper successor to Windows 7. (At least, that's what most of the reviews say.) People who have hung onto Windows XP can now consider moving to Windows 10 without that horrible Windows 8 learning curve. All the things left out of Windows 8 have now been restored to Windows 10 making it look like a properly souped up Windows 7 computer. The Start Menu is back.
If you own Windows 7 (or Windows 8.1), then you qualify for a free upgrade to Windows 10. No rush. You have the next year to do it. If you're happy with what you have now, then don't be in too much of a hurry. The early stages of any new release can be problematic. Microsoft is already planning a major update in early August. It may be to your benefit to wait until then. Or even better, you may want to postpone your upgrade until October when there is another planned release—this time with more new features, as well as, the fixing of bugs. By that time most of the upgrade problems should be worked out.
It you own Windows XP, then it will cost you $110 to get Windows 10 Home version. Plus you will need to do a clean install wiping all of your old files. In addition, there is no guarantee that the machine will support the upgrade. A couple of years ago, I had some XP machines which wouldn't take Windows 8. I can only assume that there will be some similar install problems for Windows 10 on computers which are too old.
If I were using XP, I would consider spending a few hundred dollars more and buy a new computer with much more power and less legacy problems. You won't realize what a dog you're XP is until you get one of the latest computers with faster processors and huge, speedy hard drives.
Windows 10 will include a new Web browser called Edge (clever name). Apparently, Microsoft has finally given up on Internet Explorer. (Don't worry. Internet Explorer will still be available, but only updated with security patches.) Edge looks and acts a lot like the Google Chrome browser. Humm.
If you want to know if you should get Windows 10, my answer is yes. (I don't want to be the only one upgrading.) While those funky tiles and Modern screen introduced in Windows 8 are still included, they are much easier to totally ignore in Windows 10. If you use either Windows XP or Windows 7, then the experience should be familiar. If you use any version of Windows 8, then the new operating system should be a relief. It should be worth doing—especially if it's free.
Note: If you're wondering what happened to Window 9, Microsoft skipped it. Digitally the number 10 is much more solid than the number 9—even though 9 is a perfect square. Windows 10 is intended to be the last version of Windows ever. It will be updated from here to eternity. Why the change in Microsoft's strategy? Just look at how many people still use Windows XP.
If you own Windows 7 (or Windows 8.1), then you qualify for a free upgrade to Windows 10. No rush. You have the next year to do it. If you're happy with what you have now, then don't be in too much of a hurry. The early stages of any new release can be problematic. Microsoft is already planning a major update in early August. It may be to your benefit to wait until then. Or even better, you may want to postpone your upgrade until October when there is another planned release—this time with more new features, as well as, the fixing of bugs. By that time most of the upgrade problems should be worked out.
It you own Windows XP, then it will cost you $110 to get Windows 10 Home version. Plus you will need to do a clean install wiping all of your old files. In addition, there is no guarantee that the machine will support the upgrade. A couple of years ago, I had some XP machines which wouldn't take Windows 8. I can only assume that there will be some similar install problems for Windows 10 on computers which are too old.
If I were using XP, I would consider spending a few hundred dollars more and buy a new computer with much more power and less legacy problems. You won't realize what a dog you're XP is until you get one of the latest computers with faster processors and huge, speedy hard drives.
Windows 10 will include a new Web browser called Edge (clever name). Apparently, Microsoft has finally given up on Internet Explorer. (Don't worry. Internet Explorer will still be available, but only updated with security patches.) Edge looks and acts a lot like the Google Chrome browser. Humm.
If you want to know if you should get Windows 10, my answer is yes. (I don't want to be the only one upgrading.) While those funky tiles and Modern screen introduced in Windows 8 are still included, they are much easier to totally ignore in Windows 10. If you use either Windows XP or Windows 7, then the experience should be familiar. If you use any version of Windows 8, then the new operating system should be a relief. It should be worth doing—especially if it's free.
Note: If you're wondering what happened to Window 9, Microsoft skipped it. Digitally the number 10 is much more solid than the number 9—even though 9 is a perfect square. Windows 10 is intended to be the last version of Windows ever. It will be updated from here to eternity. Why the change in Microsoft's strategy? Just look at how many people still use Windows XP.
Monday, July 27, 2015
The Decline of Facebook
Since I'm not a big fan of Facebook, maybe it's a little bit of schadenfreude when I see the signs of a major breakdown at the social media giant. I do like Facebook when photos of my grandkids are posted, but I don't consider loading the site a rewarding experience. There are two primary things that turn me off and I suspect that eventually they will be major causes for the decline of the behemoth.
Too Much Unrelated Stuff
I'm not sure why most people go to Facebook, but for me it has been a way to see what my family and friends are up to. I especially like to see pictures of my grandkids. However, lately Facebook is cluttered with tons of miscellaneous posts which detract from the experience. Users find something they like on Pinterest, or some other third party service, and post it as something they like. In and of themselves these postings are not necessarily a bad thing, but it would be nice if it were done sparingly. I notice that certain people tend to post everything they come across on the Internet. I find myself paging through reams of unrelated material just to catch a couple of photos of the people I care about. In the past, this was not the case.
I see that many people use Facebook as a place to post all their personal opinions, although they don't actually express those ideas themselves. They find sites which provide material that they ardently agree with and post one article (or clever poster image) after another, after another, after another … I can tolerate an opinion or two, but the repetition of reposting the same ideological themes over and over again becomes tedious and boring–even if I happen to agree with the sentiment. I've had to block the posts from friends (who I agree with politically) because the sheer number of posts was just too overwhelming. Unfortunately, when I do block their postings, I no longer see their personal items which I might find interesting.
To make matters worse Facebook now adds "Suggested Posts" to the page in hopes that I will contribute even more to the clutter. I know that there is money in these tidbits for Facebook, but for me they are Spam. I suspect that there are many people who feel the same way.
Maybe I'm an outlier, but this overwhelming addition of minutiae seems to be killing the Facebook brand. When the site becomes an ordeal rather than an experience which actually connects people with friends and family, it becomes a duty rather than enjoyment. I mostly log onto Facebook when my wife, who doesn't use computers, asks me if anyone has posted any pictures. Even then it is impersonal because I know that the images are meant for the entire known universe and I'm merely a bystander.
I much prefer the personal touch of a photo sent to my smartphone. When I receive a smartphone image from one of my kids, close relatives, or friends, I know that they have taken the time to single us out for the attention. (I can lean over to my wife and show her the latest on my smartphone without leaving my seat or wading through Facebook.) It is definitely more personal. They may also post the photos on Facebook, but the extra effort to target my phone makes it a little more intimate. There is little personal about Facebook, and now, with the massive number of third-party posts I wade through on each visit, I feel even more estranged from the system. But that is not the only reason that I think the future of the giant social media platform is murky. Facebook now serves as a source of separation and antagonism
.
"In-Your-Face" Book
The current political climate is the most polarized (and emotional) that I have seen in my lifetime. While there have always been people on the extremes, in the past people were circumspect about where they expressed their most controversial views. Now they wear their opinions on their proverbial sleeves–Facebook, Twitter, or another Internet mouthpiece. It is exacerbated by the easy posting of cute graphics used to emphasize a particular political point.
For example, while half of your Facebook friends may enjoy articles or cartoons attacking (or supporting) Obama, the other half may find them offensive. The feelings run so strongly on both sides that whether it is known or not by the poster, reactions are invoked and relationships are hurt. This lack of personal discretion when openingly expressing views turns off people with contrary beliefs and makes Facebook a less hospitable environment.
I suppose it's not a problem if all of your family and friends share the same political beliefs, but how often does that happen? More than once I have had a gut reaction to a third-party political post which was either inaccurate or totally gratuitous. While I'm immediately tempted to correct the errors by responding to the post, I know that it's a trap to be avoided.
Although when face-to-face I may engage in political discussions with friends on a one-to-one basis, expressing my most closely held positions on the Internet is counterproductive. Many may agree with me, but those who disagree will not be pleased with my thoughts. Long ago, I learned through ComputorEdge that one stray comment can start a war. In a forum like Facebook, it's best to hold your tongue.
I think that young people are especially vulnerable to talking too much on Facebook. I have relatives and friends who freely spout off their views on almost any topic. While I may not agree with their words, I have even more concern about how the poster might be impacted if the words are read by the wrong person–possibly their boss (or prospective boss). While people may claim to believe in freedom of speech, you had better pick your words carefully. Even if it's your right to say it, there are many who will not forgive you for doing so.
The point is that people often use Facebook as a confrontational platform. They may not intend it that way (or they may), but not everyone shares their opinion. Is it really a good idea for a private individual to make their innermost thoughts public? I think not. Who knows–you may want to run for president someday? Some less than well thought out views expressed on social media when you were just a pup may come back to sink your campaign. Even if you don't plan to ever run for office, political views are meant to be expressed in more private venues such as Thanksgiving dinner with your crazy relatives.
This polarizing aspect of Facebook, plus plethora of third-party posts, makes it an antisocial environment. (Ironically, it should be called "antisocial" media.) While I continue to access Facebook in hopes of catching pictures of my grandchildren, I've learned to speed past the chaff left behind by Facebook money making operations and well-meaning friends who want to influence world opinion. While I don't think that the collapse of Facebook is imminent, I do think it is coming…and there is nothing Facebook can do about it. When it happens, it will be a rapid decline. The history of the Internet tells us that this will be the case. After all, Facebook doesn't provide any unique content–its users do that. Facebook is merely a bunch of computers hosting what just happens to be the flavor of the day. If the users go, Facebook goes.
When my kids stop posting photos of their kids on Facebook, I'm gone.
Too Much Unrelated Stuff
I'm not sure why most people go to Facebook, but for me it has been a way to see what my family and friends are up to. I especially like to see pictures of my grandkids. However, lately Facebook is cluttered with tons of miscellaneous posts which detract from the experience. Users find something they like on Pinterest, or some other third party service, and post it as something they like. In and of themselves these postings are not necessarily a bad thing, but it would be nice if it were done sparingly. I notice that certain people tend to post everything they come across on the Internet. I find myself paging through reams of unrelated material just to catch a couple of photos of the people I care about. In the past, this was not the case.
I see that many people use Facebook as a place to post all their personal opinions, although they don't actually express those ideas themselves. They find sites which provide material that they ardently agree with and post one article (or clever poster image) after another, after another, after another … I can tolerate an opinion or two, but the repetition of reposting the same ideological themes over and over again becomes tedious and boring–even if I happen to agree with the sentiment. I've had to block the posts from friends (who I agree with politically) because the sheer number of posts was just too overwhelming. Unfortunately, when I do block their postings, I no longer see their personal items which I might find interesting.
To make matters worse Facebook now adds "Suggested Posts" to the page in hopes that I will contribute even more to the clutter. I know that there is money in these tidbits for Facebook, but for me they are Spam. I suspect that there are many people who feel the same way.
Maybe I'm an outlier, but this overwhelming addition of minutiae seems to be killing the Facebook brand. When the site becomes an ordeal rather than an experience which actually connects people with friends and family, it becomes a duty rather than enjoyment. I mostly log onto Facebook when my wife, who doesn't use computers, asks me if anyone has posted any pictures. Even then it is impersonal because I know that the images are meant for the entire known universe and I'm merely a bystander.
I much prefer the personal touch of a photo sent to my smartphone. When I receive a smartphone image from one of my kids, close relatives, or friends, I know that they have taken the time to single us out for the attention. (I can lean over to my wife and show her the latest on my smartphone without leaving my seat or wading through Facebook.) It is definitely more personal. They may also post the photos on Facebook, but the extra effort to target my phone makes it a little more intimate. There is little personal about Facebook, and now, with the massive number of third-party posts I wade through on each visit, I feel even more estranged from the system. But that is not the only reason that I think the future of the giant social media platform is murky. Facebook now serves as a source of separation and antagonism
.
"In-Your-Face" Book
The current political climate is the most polarized (and emotional) that I have seen in my lifetime. While there have always been people on the extremes, in the past people were circumspect about where they expressed their most controversial views. Now they wear their opinions on their proverbial sleeves–Facebook, Twitter, or another Internet mouthpiece. It is exacerbated by the easy posting of cute graphics used to emphasize a particular political point.
For example, while half of your Facebook friends may enjoy articles or cartoons attacking (or supporting) Obama, the other half may find them offensive. The feelings run so strongly on both sides that whether it is known or not by the poster, reactions are invoked and relationships are hurt. This lack of personal discretion when openingly expressing views turns off people with contrary beliefs and makes Facebook a less hospitable environment.
I suppose it's not a problem if all of your family and friends share the same political beliefs, but how often does that happen? More than once I have had a gut reaction to a third-party political post which was either inaccurate or totally gratuitous. While I'm immediately tempted to correct the errors by responding to the post, I know that it's a trap to be avoided.
Although when face-to-face I may engage in political discussions with friends on a one-to-one basis, expressing my most closely held positions on the Internet is counterproductive. Many may agree with me, but those who disagree will not be pleased with my thoughts. Long ago, I learned through ComputorEdge that one stray comment can start a war. In a forum like Facebook, it's best to hold your tongue.
I think that young people are especially vulnerable to talking too much on Facebook. I have relatives and friends who freely spout off their views on almost any topic. While I may not agree with their words, I have even more concern about how the poster might be impacted if the words are read by the wrong person–possibly their boss (or prospective boss). While people may claim to believe in freedom of speech, you had better pick your words carefully. Even if it's your right to say it, there are many who will not forgive you for doing so.
The point is that people often use Facebook as a confrontational platform. They may not intend it that way (or they may), but not everyone shares their opinion. Is it really a good idea for a private individual to make their innermost thoughts public? I think not. Who knows–you may want to run for president someday? Some less than well thought out views expressed on social media when you were just a pup may come back to sink your campaign. Even if you don't plan to ever run for office, political views are meant to be expressed in more private venues such as Thanksgiving dinner with your crazy relatives.
This polarizing aspect of Facebook, plus plethora of third-party posts, makes it an antisocial environment. (Ironically, it should be called "antisocial" media.) While I continue to access Facebook in hopes of catching pictures of my grandchildren, I've learned to speed past the chaff left behind by Facebook money making operations and well-meaning friends who want to influence world opinion. While I don't think that the collapse of Facebook is imminent, I do think it is coming…and there is nothing Facebook can do about it. When it happens, it will be a rapid decline. The history of the Internet tells us that this will be the case. After all, Facebook doesn't provide any unique content–its users do that. Facebook is merely a bunch of computers hosting what just happens to be the flavor of the day. If the users go, Facebook goes.
When my kids stop posting photos of their kids on Facebook, I'm gone.
Saturday, July 25, 2015
Blogging on Blogger (or BlogSpot)
I recently started a new blog on WordPress for writing about AutoHotkey–my passion. However, I realized that from time to time I may want to say something about a non-AutoHotkey topic. I could throw it in under the same WordPress blog as "Off-Topic" but that could get pretty messy and confusing. Plus, I wanted to try other free blogging platforms (another possible topic for blogging). That brought me to Blogger (or BlogSpot) which it turns out is owned by Google.
I reserve this blog for my opinions on almost any topic. For example, I plan for my first blog (technically the second blog after this one) to address the decline of Facebook (or as I like to call it "In-Your-Face-Book") and the two factors which will bring it to its knees–one of which is self-inflicted and, possibly, unavoidable. There are a couple of topics which I will avoid on this blog. The first is AutoHotkey since I have another blog specifically for that purpose. The second is politics which has become so polarized that I see little reason throw in my two cents. (If I don't tick off one reader, I will tick off the other.)
I will say that I'm a pragmatist and don't care for the extremes on either the left or the right. My libertarian streak tells me to leave others alone as long as what they don't infringe on other people. It also makes me very suspicious of government intrusion. The problem with government is that it is inherently incompetent. The bigger it is the more incompetent it becomes. It isn't that people don't mean to do well. "The road to hell is paved with good intentions." However, there is need for government. The question is "How much and how big?"
I'm a capitalist and have great admiration for entrepreneurs–not so much for those who come after and collect huge salaries for being caretakers. I've been through the cycle myself by starting a business from nothing, then enjoying huge ego-building success only to live through the humbling experience of a complete collapse. I like to think that it has made me older and wiser, but more likely it's just turned me into an old wise guy.
ComputorEdge has become a page of links to other Web pages. Most of them are beginning AutoHotkey tutorial pages. (If you're not using AutoHotkey with your Windows computer, then you should start.) I also have a site cleverly named ComputorEdge E-Books dedicated to selling books–most of which are about AutoHotkey.
Anything I write will be with a purpose and hopefully educational. I tend to avoid controversial statements not because they are inaccurate, but because it is difficult for people to hear while they are yelling at you. Of course, the words in this blog will be "just my opinions", but that doesn't mean that they aren't right and worth heeding.
I reserve this blog for my opinions on almost any topic. For example, I plan for my first blog (technically the second blog after this one) to address the decline of Facebook (or as I like to call it "In-Your-Face-Book") and the two factors which will bring it to its knees–one of which is self-inflicted and, possibly, unavoidable. There are a couple of topics which I will avoid on this blog. The first is AutoHotkey since I have another blog specifically for that purpose. The second is politics which has become so polarized that I see little reason throw in my two cents. (If I don't tick off one reader, I will tick off the other.)
I will say that I'm a pragmatist and don't care for the extremes on either the left or the right. My libertarian streak tells me to leave others alone as long as what they don't infringe on other people. It also makes me very suspicious of government intrusion. The problem with government is that it is inherently incompetent. The bigger it is the more incompetent it becomes. It isn't that people don't mean to do well. "The road to hell is paved with good intentions." However, there is need for government. The question is "How much and how big?"
I'm a capitalist and have great admiration for entrepreneurs–not so much for those who come after and collect huge salaries for being caretakers. I've been through the cycle myself by starting a business from nothing, then enjoying huge ego-building success only to live through the humbling experience of a complete collapse. I like to think that it has made me older and wiser, but more likely it's just turned me into an old wise guy.
ComputorEdge has become a page of links to other Web pages. Most of them are beginning AutoHotkey tutorial pages. (If you're not using AutoHotkey with your Windows computer, then you should start.) I also have a site cleverly named ComputorEdge E-Books dedicated to selling books–most of which are about AutoHotkey.
Anything I write will be with a purpose and hopefully educational. I tend to avoid controversial statements not because they are inaccurate, but because it is difficult for people to hear while they are yelling at you. Of course, the words in this blog will be "just my opinions", but that doesn't mean that they aren't right and worth heeding.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)